Still don't get why people insist on this. If it was a PvP based game surely they'd have world pvp right? Not talking about WvW. Just because it actually balances the classes correctly doesn't make it a PvP based game.

Although WoW, Rift, SWTOR may label some of their in game activities as "PvP", aka stomping/ganking people that are lower level and less geared than you. It really isn't really PvP, its really more closer to a hazing ritual than it is to true PvP.

WoW-like arena/deathmatch map with multiple brackets and no side objectives would be a step forward and an awesome feature. It just comes down to how deaf they are and are they going to ignore requests .

Conquest maps are going to get old alot faster if they're the only option. Alot of people don't like semi pve conquest scoreboard AND a Dota-like beast that provides buffs when killed; though i'm looking forward to play it for fun from time to time.

They're catering to casuals and 'battleground' ppl this way, they shouldn't settle on conquest style alone.

I don't know. Arena PvP with more than like 2 people would just be "who can kill this person faster" in GW2. It works for 3v3 and 5v5 in WoW because of the longevity healers provide and the absurd amount of control some classes have. (and most people consider WoW PvP to be terrible, but that's most likely a result of Blizzard not giving one shit about class balance)

Low number pvp is a problem because it requires a different balance than larger scale(10+) pvp. With 2v2, 3v3, 5v5, you create hard counters, FotM, and top tier comps. It's hard to avoid, because, unless all classes are the same, certain classes counter other classes, and certain classes can cover other classes weakness. This means that you get comps which simply are tons better than others, such as RMP or RMS right now in WoW. As for longevity, I think large scale pvp has more longevity, because it is so much more diverse in approaches to winning. In arenas, you have a set hierarchy kill order most of the time, and pretty consistent strats, but in large scale pvp it is never the same. Within one game, you could have a 1v1, then a 8v5, then a 3v3, all the while different players will be popping in and out, changing how you have to approach the battle, and all of this happens while you need to be completing an objective.

I believe arenas would be a bad direction to go, it creates class imbalance, and really destroys certain classes ability to pvp, which is against the whole idea of an mmo.

WoW-like arena/deathmatch map with multiple brackets and no side objectives would be a step forward and an awesome feature. It just comes down to how deaf they are and are they going to ignore requests .

Conquest maps are going to get old alot faster if they're the only option. Alot of people don't like semi pve conquest scoreboard AND a Dota-like beast that provides buffs when killed; though i'm looking forward to play it for fun from time to time.

They're catering to casuals and 'battleground' ppl this way, they shouldn't settle on conquest style alone.

Agreed. It's a huge population of WoWers they could lure over with this system. I personally would love deathmatch arenas because I find them to be more enjoyable then capping objectives all day. Sometimes i just have a lust for blood.

Whats nice about GW2 is that since each player is limited to so few skills (compared to WoW atleast) that they can use at one time, that its MUCH easier to balance. You dont have to balance with the assumption that they will use 40 different skills in a PvP setting like in WoW, which is nigh impossible.

My God, what a horrible creation. People seeing what they want? Thank God they tried to shy away from that. I know it pisses me off when I'm in an heroic raid, yet in the back of my head all I can think is 'some casual player is playing a heroic dungeon and not wiping.' -Vodkarn

Agreed. It's a huge population of WoWers they could lure over with this system. I personally would love deathmatch arenas because I find them to be more enjoyable then capping objectives all day. Sometimes i just have a lust for blood.

I agree. Variety is the spice of life after all. I am sure I would get tired of capturing bases, too. If they don't have arena or a tournament option, maybe just a dueling feature would be nice. I always found dueling fun with the right people.

If they put in a WoW style arena system, that would be a pretty significant step back. At that point you're increasing the importance of the comp/counter-comp meta game, which is never good for balance. Honestly, if they put one in I'd be very disappointed.

Whats nice about GW2 is that since each player is limited to so few skills (compared to WoW atleast) that they can use at one time, that its MUCH easier to balance. You dont have to balance with the assumption that they will use 40 different skills in a PvP setting like in WoW, which is nigh impossible.

Ya, GW2 arena would be a breeze and it's definitely something they should do

Still don't get why people insist on this. If it was a PvP based game surely they'd have world pvp right? Not talking about WvW. Just because it actually balances the classes correctly doesn't make it a PvP based game.

Lol because world PvP is the epitome of PvP.

Lol. And tell me how there would be world PvP without multiple factions? Unless it's just a free for all, which a lot of people would hate.

---------- Post added 2012-02-27 at 12:06 PM ----------

Originally Posted by edgecrusherO0

If they put in a WoW style arena system, that would be a pretty significant step back. At that point you're increasing the importance of the comp/counter-comp meta game, which is never good for balance. Honestly, if they put one in I'd be very disappointed.

I don't think it would be that much of a problem if they just let it be 5v5. The less people there are, the more dependent it is on the classes.

If they put in a WoW style arena system, that would be a pretty significant step back. At that point you're increasing the importance of the comp/counter-comp meta game, which is never good for balance. Honestly, if they put one in I'd be very disappointed.

5v5 ranked matches will be very much based on the comp of the team at higher levels. There will undoubtedly be 5 man compositions that are better than others.

5v5 ranked matches will be very much based on the comp of the team at higher levels. There will undoubtedly be 5 man compositions that are better than others.

If you're talking about 5v5 in the battlegrounds (the capture the point ones), there will undoubtedly be a comp metagame, but it will have less emphasis on trying to out-comp the other team (which is the ENTIRE metagame in 5v5 deathmatch), and more on getting a comp that works well for the map. That's fine because it's easier to balance classes around those kinds of comps compared to the comp/counter-comp system.

It attracts a certain type of personality that really aggravates me to the extremes, and I would hate to deal with those types of assholes again in GW2.

This.

Originally Posted by edgecrusherO0

If they put in a WoW style arena system, that would be a pretty significant step back. At that point you're increasing the importance of the comp/counter-comp meta game, which is never good for balance. Honestly, if they put one in I'd be very disappointed.

And definitely this.

I guess I don't really have anything else to add other than that from an E-Sport standpoint, nobody is interested in spectating arena-style gameplay. It tends to be boring and simultaneously confusing to watch. Arena would introduce too many negatives to the game without any real positives. I'd prefer never to see it in GW2.

I never liked WoW Arena, it created an egotistical environment that encouraged elitism and disrespect towards others, and I personally feel it was responsible for killing server communities after BC.

It attracts a certain type of personality that really aggravates me to the extremes, and I would hate to deal with those types of assholes again in GW2.

But... if it was just for fun, not rated in any form without any benefit, I wouldn't mind it as a niche form of PvP to enjoy time to time.

by eliminating reward for competition and a ranking system in PvP you ultimately destroy PvP as endgame material. You could say the same attitudes arise in PvE I mean aren't these types of attitudes prevalent in all types of competition? And I believe your claims of arena killing server communities is a little unrealistic. WoW was pretty busy with server activity on most servers during BC...

by eliminating reward for competition and a ranking system in PvP you ultimately destroy PvP as endgame material. You could say the same attitudes arise in PvE I mean aren't these types of attitudes prevalent in all types of competition? And I believe your claims of arena killing server communities is a little unrealistic. WoW was pretty busy with server activity on most servers during BC...

If that was the case, games like Counter-Strike, Halo, and RTS should have been complete failures when they came out.

Last time I checked, they still go strong even without rewards systems that RPG's have.

The thing about rewards is that it rewards one of two things: participation, or success. When you have this type of system for PvE, success is marginal to what you perceive is a victory. for some folks, beating that boss is a victory, others beating the entire dungeon is.

However, PvP is a different element entirely. that is because your not fighting an NPC, your fighting another human being, and when you reward people for success, you tend to alienate those who were defeated even more than what defeat would have been if there was no reward system in place.

Now defeat means more than just losing, it means you lost your reward as well. This type of reward system inevitably promotes a have/have-not personality amongst gamers, and they tend to be VERY violent and arrogant in their views on the other side.

I would rather the game be about having fun, and not comparing what I have to someone else. <--- that is why I say Arena killed WoW communities, because it divided them amongst those types of lines, you never saw that kind of hate between people on the same server in Vanilla, you would say "cool! he got Grand Marshall, I can get that too if i participate long enough" whereas after arena, you got "Lol, this guy doesn't have 1800 rating/ challenger/arena master, he must suck" or "That guy is a douche, he has Arena Master... probably bought it too".

Rewarding someone for participation is fine, but rewarding people for succeeding against others in PvP creates a harmful playerbase.

EDIT: and yes, I know GW2 has a rated system, however, it does not reward people to such an extent from what we know so far.

Even on conquest maps there is nothing stoping 2 teams that really want to deathmatch from just seting up their own game and ignoreing the objectives in favor of a blood bath. yes there would be a bit of an honor system involved as no game mechanics prevents a dead player from reviveing and rejoining the fight but it can be done.

Honestly I dont think team deathmatch would be all that fun. I can see it quickly devolving into being an assist train burst down the first target you see and the first team to kill an enemy is probably going to win scenario. you dont have healers that can power heal through a spike like you do in wow arena's. no longish duration CC either to try and lock down foes. The reason conquest ballances out is if a team moves as a clump of 5 yes they can spike down any one person but they will loose because the other team keeps 2 flags perma caped and just rotate away from the zerg. When they spread out combat gets more intresting as there is no longer the DPS to spike a target down in a couple of seconds.